Slow movie day around here and since no one else around here is going to do it, I guess I will. The Love Guru topped the nominees with seven Razzie Nominations this year. Congratulations Mike Myers!
Really though, the only good to come of these worthless awards (seriously, how can you nominate someone three times as one nomination?) is to see if Uwe Boll actually shows up to receive his carreer (non)-achievement award and then beat the shit out of the presenter and tell the audience to “go f*ck themselves!”.
On a personal note, I think I may have set a personal best for actually seeing SIX of all the films nominated this year (The Happening, Repo! The Genetic Opera, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale, (half of) Postal and Star Wars: The Clone Wars).
For anyone who cares, all of the nominees are below the seats… where they belong.
Worst Picture:
Disaster Movie and Meet the Spartans (jointly)
The Happening
The Hottie and the Nottie
In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale
The Love Guru
Worst Actor:
Larry the Cable Guy for Witless Protection
Eddie Murphy for Meet Dave
Mike Myers for The Love Guru
Al Pacino for 88 Minutes and Righteous Kill
Mark Wahlberg for The Happening and Max Payne
Worst Actress:
Jessica Alba for The Eye and The Love Guru
Cameron Diaz for What Happens in Vegas
Paris Hilton for The Hottie and the Nottie
Kate Hudson for Fool’s Gold and My Best Friend’s Girl
All the women for The Women (Annette Bening, Eva Mendes, Debra Messing, Jada Pinkett Smith and Meg Ryan)
Worst Supporting Actor:
Uwe Boll (as himself) in Postal
Pierce Brosnan in Mamma Mia!
Ben Kingsley in The Love Guru, War, Inc. and The Wackness
Burt Reynolds in Deal and In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale
Verne Troyer in The Love Guru and Postal
Worst Supporting Actress:
Carmen Electra for Disaster Movie and Meet the Spartans
Paris Hilton for Repo! The Genetic Opera
Kim Kardashian for Disaster Movie
Jenny McCarthy for Witless Protection
Leelee Sobieski for 88 Minutes and In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale
Worst Screen Couple:
Uwe Boll and “any actor, camera or screenplay” in 1968 Tunnel Rats, In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale, and Postal
Cameron Diaz and Ashton Kutcher in What Happens in Vegas
Paris Hilton and either Christine Lakin or Joel David Moore in The Hottie and the Nottie
Larry the Cable Guy and Jenny McCarthy in Witless Protection
Eddie Murphy and Eddie Murphy in Meet Dave
Worst Director:
Uwe Boll for 1968 Tunnel Rats, In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale, and Postal
Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer for Disaster Movie and Meet the Spartans
Tom Putnam for The Hottie and the Nottie
Marco Schnabel for The Love Guru
M. Night Shyamalan for The Happening
Worst Screenplay:
Disaster Movie and Meet the Spartans (jointly) (written by Jason Friedberg & Aaron Seltzer)
The Happening (written by M. Night Shyamalan)
The Hottie and the Nottie (written by Heidi Ferrer)
In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale (screenplay by Doug Taylor)
The Love Guru (written by Mike Myers & Graham Gordy)
Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-off or Sequel:
The Day the Earth Stood Still (remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still)
Disaster Movie and Meet The Spartans (jointly) (“rip-off of everything”)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (sequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark)
Speed Racer (rip-off of the TV series Speed Racer)
Star Wars: The Clone Wars (sequel to Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, prequel to Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith)
Worst Career Achievement:
Uwe Boll
I still think the Razzies serve a higher purpose than the Golden Globes.
How?
The Razzies have about as much worth as a Mad Magazine spoof of Good Will Hunting called “Bad Won’t Farming” – they take a decent idea (spoofing the Oscars) and do a shitty job that any film blog could do better, and get press.
Fuckfaces.
And I hate the Golden Globes, but at least they get people to see some of the movies on the list.
Kurt loses.
The Razzies are nice because, if nothing else, they remind us how much Uwe Boll sucks at life. Once a year is enough of a reminder for me.
What higher purpose does the Razzies serve? Well, I guess self indulgence for the sake of humour appeals to me much more than self-indulgence to Star-Fuck. The Globes have been and always will be Starfucking. At least The Oscars are given out by an organization founded within the industry. The HFP who vote on the Globes are the E! and ET of the rest of the world. I just find it baffling that the Globes gets the attention it so does not deserve. The razzies are silly and useless, but The Globes are so far worse as to allow for the statement that the Razzies serve a higher purpose. Or something like that.
Here’s an example of how I would handle the Razzies.
At the Golden Globes, Colin Farrell was nominated for, and won, for Best Comedy or Musical Supporting Actor… in In Bruges
He was in that movie long enough to probably count as the lead, for one. Secondly, and most importantly, In Bruges isn’t a fucking comedy. It has a few funny moments, but we’re talking about a quiet, serious movie that is mostly about atonement for
SPOILER ALERT
SPOILER ALERT
killing a child accidentally. Hi-larious. A movie where everyone ends up dead at the end, Hamlet-style. Comedy? Are they handing out noms based on the trailer? Who the fuck thought this was a comedy, and that Colin Farrell was the epitome of comedic acting in 2008?
So…
I’d have the Razzies have a supporting actor category, and nominate Colin Farrell for In Bruges. And when the press ask why, say “exactly”. Its clear the Razzies have aims beyond simply attacking the worst of the year, otherwise they wouldnt make up categories and combine movies into one nominee, so they might as well fuck with everything else and rig the winners too.
The Golden Globes fuck up because its put together by fuckups who don’t know what they’re doing. The razzies fuck up because its put together by idiots who simply got there first.
In Bruges is most certainly a dark comedy Goon.
I agree. I was laughing my ass off in In Bruges.
I do not see the argument that it is more of a comedy than a drama. There are a few funny parts, but it does not fit at all.
The entire film was laced with gallows humor to help them account for the horrible acts that had proceeded these events. From the opening monologue to the final act of suicide. Hell, the movie even pulled off a botched murder/suicide by using humor to resolve the conflict between the two characters.
Practically every line out of Farrell’s mouth was a joke of some kind, as that is how he attempted to compensate for doing what he considered was an unforgivable act. Sure their was introspection and existentialism, but the film was quite funny, as it perfectly served the narrative to have these characters try and protect themselves with humor rather then simply focus on how damned they were.
Dangerous Liaisons is very funny. American Psycho is funny. Are those thus, comedies?
if Farrell in In Bruges is a comedic performance, than Heath Ledger’s Joker is too.
American Psycho is a dark comedy, yes. Almost everything Bret Easton Ellis has ever written is. Dangerous Liasons is typically seen as a straight drama, but it is darkly satirical and allegorical, though much of that is dependent on Malcovich, who’s character most certainly revels in schadenfreude and translates the humor he finds in that to the audience.
And yes, the Joker is a darkly comedic character as well, as is Ledger’s performance. The basis of the character is someone who finds anarchy and death funny. Thus with each horrible act finds greater amusement.
Maybe you only get dick and fart jokes, Goon? Dane Cook has got to have a new comedy coming out soon. You’ll probably love it.
So you can agree that Liaisons is funny for all these complex reasons, but then assume one only likes dick and fart jokes. Matt adds another level of Campea-ness by contradicting himself in the same post for the sake of Dane Cook bashing
Which is actually a worthwhile pastime.
The thing is, is it a drama with comedic elements, or a comedy with dramatic elements, and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that In Bruges is a fucking drama with some comedic elements, and those elements aren’t even nearly as pronounced as anything Easton Ellis has ever written.
I’m confused as how Speed Racer can be a rip-off of Speed Racer…
Anyway….
My beef with the Razzies is that they always miss out on the really obscure amazing bad movies that come out through DTV circuits and such. Too populist I say, but then no one would really care if they couldn’t recognize the titles.
Indy 4 should be nominated for Worst Picture though.
I’m stating Malcovich’s performance is funny, and his character is darkly comedic, but the film is not a comedy. Nor does it aspire to be. Nothing contradictory about it, no matter how much you attempt to say it is.
“This film debut by the theater writer and director Martin McDonagh is an endlessly surprising, very dark, human comedy, with a plot that cannot be foreseen but only relished.”
-Roger Ebert
The British Independent Film Awards nominated it for Best Comedy.
Rotten Tomatoes lists it as a comedy. With the consensus of the critics being “Featuring witty dialogue and deft performances In Bruges is an effective mix of dark comedy and crime thriller elements.”
Get over yourself Goon, it’s a comedy. That you can’t see it is your fault, not the films.
those elements aren’t even nearly as pronounced as anything Easton Ellis has ever written.
Says the guy who has to ask if American Psycho is a comedy. Evidently Ellis’ comedy isn’t that pronounced to you.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say American Psycho is a ‘comedy’, but it’s definitely satirical and has very funny moments.
Oh fuck off with the phony trolling Gamble, you know damn well I was asking about Ellis as a rhetorical question, trying to gauge a line between how you label drama and comedy.
I don’t see American Psycho as anything but a satirical dark comedy.
You know what the absolute best part of In The Name of the King is? On the DVD cover there is this blurb:
“A Grand, Epic Adventure!”
Source? Josh Tyler, Cinemablend.com, reaching for the stars. Incidentally, tried going to CB to link to the actual review where that quote was *not* taken out of context. Strangely, the url forwards to a YouTube episode of the kids show Bleach. So either they got hacked or there are some internal shenanigans. Either way it ruins my bit so I’ll have to save it with this:
You know who could make a great quote whore? Campea. Too bad he sucks at it.